The only comment that I'd care to make before having a closer look at the matter is that in my opinion the defendants erred in failing to take prompt legal action aimed at mitigation of/relief from a nuisance, i.e. light trespass, choosing instead to contact the advertisers over a period of time to voice their complaints regardingthe billboard. Of course, they have every right to peacefully voice their concerns to those purchasing space, but that will not prevent a lawsuit if a court finds that the advertising company has standing, which it apparently has so determined.

The corp doesn't have a legal standing....people have a right to freedom of speech.....the corp has the right to advertise "Shop these businesses" and the people have the right to advertise "Don't shop these businesses". If that don't work, wait for the next strong wind.....

Plus, they're stupid: You can't read the darn things until you get close enough, just in time for them to change to something else that you can't read in time before you pass it! I understand the economy of it, but sheesh!

This sort of sidetracks me to: Why have all emergency services vehicle lights switched to strobe lights? When you have nighttime construction or an accident on the freeway at night, with lots of vehicles there,these things are horribly confusing, and I'll bet more than one epileptic seizure has been triggered by them (not to mention accidents)!

Probably arranged by the same idiots that gave us "roundabout" freeway on/off ramps.

I think this just another example, and a particularly egregious one, of the sensory overkill that is becoming a characteristic of our culture. Not only in the visual domain, but also in the audible. I haven't been doing any highway driving at night lately, but I recall how those things both annoy you and destroy night vision simultaneously. Similarly, the assorted back-up beeps of construction vehicles, car alarm trips, cell ring tones, subwoofer growlings from automobile stereos, and emergency vehicle redundant noise-making (in addition to the strobes!) are just another facet of that overall trend. Face it, we are living in a culture styled after an action movie or a video game.

I have to disagree. I believe a corporation is a legal construct that has individual people working for it. During their time of employment, the people do things and make decisions based on what is best for the corporation normally. These decisions may be different than the ones they would make if they or their families were the only ones affected. As I see it, a corporation is more of an organized mob, with the appropriate mentality.

Though many corporations do try to do the right thing, something like light pollution falls outside of anything they would think about being bad. There are no cost benefit ratios to be calculated and no safety type statistics that the corporation can use to form an opinion or decide on an action. Until enough people complain about issues like what these people face, we are all just a bunch of odd ball cranks to be dismissed by corporate logic.

The only comment that I'd care to make before having a closer look at the matter is that in my opinion the defendants erred in failing to take prompt legal action aimed at mitigation of/relief from a nuisance, i.e. light trespass, choosing instead to contact the advertisers over a period of time to voice their complaints regardingthe billboard. Of course, they have every right to peacefully voice their concerns to those purchasing space, but that will not prevent a lawsuit if a court finds that the advertising company has standing, which it apparently has so determined.

This looks like a classic SLAPP by the lawyer for the billboard company, and unfortunately, these homeowners are going to get put in the wringer, financially and mentally, by the legal process and court system. Some states have anti-SLAPP laws on the books to prevent this kind of abuse.